Ok...I want to know your opinion. Do you REALLY think Tank will be the "dynamic" player we need (a 60-70 pt player..25-35 goals) or do you think he will just slowly fade out. I admit his POTENTIAL is great, but I believe he will never score 150 pts. He gets a ton of "chances", but not the results. Of course, I hope I eat crow...but I'm not heating up the oven just yet.

I think he'll be good. It's been 48 games (some of which he was out with a concussion), and he's shown flashes of brilliance. He's not there yet, but it would be foolish to expect him to be fully developed this quickly.

What do you mean by 150 points? I assume you mean for his career, but even mediocre players get that. In a season it's clearly not realistic.

He definitely wasn't the same player after the concussion. But he's only 30 some games into his NHL career. He has the potential to be dynamic but he's got a lot to learn about the NHL game too. Jury is still out of course. It will be interesting to see the strides he makes over the offseason and into next year.

And he represents the last of the true "blue chip" prospects in the system.

To survive in today's NHL you have to be able to spend wisely, keep a few of the "all-stars" you want but be able to release the rest with enough on the farm (or intelligent, low-cost free agent signings) to fill the void. Kind of concerns me we're back to the 2000's era a little bit in that we're dealing our first round pick every year again.

I thought Tank really started commanding the puck much more late in the season and thought he was on the verge of breaking out (and I'm usually overly negative about every prospect).......that said, clearly Hitch didn't see the same thing as Tank will be watching the game tonight.

Would like to see him in game 4. Put the challenge to him and see how he responds. If he plays to his potential tomorrow night it might be just enough to tip the scales in the Blues' favor.

Although I don't know who should sit out for him at this point, assuming no injuries to anyone. Hard call to make. But as others have mentioned here, some lamp lighting is needed. Maybe Tarasenko is that guy...?

I will admit Stewart played a stronger game in Game 3. But he still was not working both ends of the ice - which drives me nuts. IMO, Tarasenko's ability to work both ends, win board battles, hit, and finish means Stewart should sit. If he is not scoring, #25 is the weakest link on this team. Add in the chemistry Tarasenko clearly had with Sobotka, and it would seem to be a natural swap. Unfortunately, it will probably be Schwartz or one of the 4th liners who sit, even though Schwartz has been one of the Blues best players at forcing turnovers and generating chances. How often do you see Stewart forcing turnovers ala Schwartz? It's not like Stewart didn't work out this off-season to have more speed and stamina, along with is already considerable size. When I see guys like Oshie, Sobotka, and Schwartz outhitting opponents, outworking opponents, using their speed to generate turnovers, and creating chances, I can't help but think WTF is going through Stewart's mind when he does not seem to put forth even 1/4th the effort these smaller guys do. Tarasenko puts forth the effort of Oshie, Shwartz, and Boats and all of them usually win their battles, unlike the larger Stewart - which doesn't make any sense.

We'll see how 'honest' Hitch is with his assessment. There is ZERO doubt who our least effective forward as been ........but will Andy Mac's veteran status get him a reprieve.

My guess is they sit 79 and Tank get's 8 minutes of ice time, but I'd really like to see them sit 10 and give 91 a real shot to bring something offensively.

Are faceoff win's not good for anything?

Just my opinion, but it seems to me that the Kings are doing a really good job of nullifying AndyMac's speed, really pinching down on him, taking away any space he has to work with, and he isn't quite big/strong enough to overcome it. It's what L.A. does. Against most other teams he would be faring a lot better and producing more. I don't think it's a lack of effort on his part at all -- he seems to be working his azz off. Again, just my $0.02.

Sounds like it's going to be Cracknell that sits. JR says Tarasenko and Cracknell are sharing time on 4th line today. I don't know who i want it to be, but not him.

In my eyes, it should clearly be AMac. But I guess its hard to justify sitting somoene who makes $4.7 million a year.

I'm 99.9% sure Hitch isn't playing MacDonald because of his salary. It's all about playoff experience and offensive talent in playing MacDonald over Cracknell.

I'd have been shocked if MacDonald were scratched.Hitch is going to give the veteran guy the benefit of the doubt.

Breaking up the 4th line worries me.In our conversation on Lets Go Blues Radio last night, we spoke with Eddie Garcia of the Puck Podcast (and huge Kings fan), and he was impressed with our 4th line.But all in all...I'm glad Tank is in...even at the expense of Cracknell. Tarasenko is a bigger offensive threat. And this team is better offensively with Tank and MacDonald in the lineup than Tank and Cracknell.

I get this decision. But I also get why some would question it.Hopefully both Tank and AndyMac both score tonight and make Hitch look like a genius.

Who is online

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum